An interview with Leonid Komarovsky, a prominent Russian journalist and émigré to the United States, who on November 26, 2002, was detained by Turkmen authorities  after visiting the Central Asian country  on business. His arrest came on the heels of a failed attempt on the life of Turkmenistan’s president, Saparmurat Niyazov.

Washington Profile: What are conditions like in Turkmenistan today?

Komarovsky: Turkmenbashi, who once went by his given name, Saparmurat Atayevich Niyazov, and was a member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, came to power in a way that’s typical for the new states of the former Soviet Union. In its final days, he had already been the Turkmen Soviet Socialist Republic’s main communist leader, and thus easily won the presidential elections following independence. He went on to prevail in subsequent elections with 99.95 percent of the vote, and later he proclaimed himself Turkmenistan’s leader for life. More than thirteen years of Turkmenbashi at the helm has rendered the country’s people poverty-stricken, turned its youth into drug addicts and created horrible unemployment (according to some estimates, more than half of the population is without work). His tenure has led to the total collapse of the country’s agricultural sector and most of its manufacturing industry, as well as to wholesale neglect of the fields of science, culture, education and medicine. The siloviks have taken over the country, illegally disregarding people and seizing their property without recourse to the law. There is probably no other country in the world where the prosecutor general receives 50 percent of all property that is confiscated by the state; at least, I don’t know of such a country.

…I watched with my own eyes as my friends’ and acquaintances’ cars, houses and businesses were seized…in a matter of days automobiles once belonging to others were re-registered with members of the prosecutor general’s office and other government offices. Their houses were occupied either by employees from the prosecutor general’s office or by their relatives; property was stolen and dragged off; businesses were taken over…

It’s no coincidence that Turkmenistan was named the worst country to live in in 2004; it was 150th in terms of economic freedom, just four places above North Korea, which held last place in the ranking. Today, Turkmenistan’s citizens have been deprived of virtually every basic human right. They may not freely move within their country without the government’s permission; obtaining exit visas is difficult and for most impossible. Prisons are overcrowded and people are tortured, sometimes fatally.

Turkmenistan’s ragged people, driven to despair, greedily hunt for news of the Great Saparmurat Turkmenbashi’s health, as he is often referred to by the official media. (There are no alternative media sources. Almost every outlet in the country is Niyazov’s personal property.) Occasionally, rumors will circulate by word of mouth that the Leader is laid up in a wheelchair…that, for instance, some kind of poisonous spider has bit him, causing him to fall into a coma for three days, etc… 

People have access only to the Turkmen press, which uses every possible method of Soviet or Goebbels-style propaganda, developed ad absurdum.  The only Russian-language paper, “Neutral Turkmenistan,” writes about Turkmenbashi and nothing else. In one edition I counted nearly three hundred direct references to the Turkmen Leader. The press treats any foreign head’s address to the president like a great success for Turkmenbashi in the international arena.  Even New Year’s greetings from world leaders are presented as a unique show of the deepest respect to the Turkmen Leader…

WP: So, regime change in Turkmenistan appears to be quite unlikely?

Komarovsky:  With respect to Niyazov’s removal from power, Turkmens have more hope in Allah than in the international community. Whether Allah will take him is now a hotly debated issue in Ashgabat. People, however, do little more than whisper among themselves because of a law in the country stipulating that any expression of doubt in the legitimacy of Turkmenbashi’s actions is punishable by up to life imprisonment. The same goes for failing to report criminal activity. There’s no question that people doubt [in his legitimacy] and that 99 percent of the people won’t report criminal activity. You simply can’t put away everyone; there won’t be enough people to guard them in prison.

WP: Do you think there’s any chance of a Kyrgyz scenario taking place in Turkmenistan?

Komarovsky: It seems highly unlikely.  There are many reasons for this. First, fear grips the entire country. Niyazov never arrests the guilty alone, but also all the “perpetrators’” relatives, acquaintances and relatives’ acquaintances. There are quite a few families I know of where hundreds or more members have been subjected to repression. Even in the U.S., Turkmen refugees are afraid to openly oppose Niyazov. I know of several demonstrations which Turkmens refused to attend simply out of fear for their loved ones still living in Turkmenistan. Second, there are the peculiarities of their mentality; Turkmens tend to be more focused on themselves and their families than on public movements.

No less important is the fact that there is absolutely no information available within the country on world events or the international community’s true attitudes toward Turkmenbashi and his domestic and foreign policies.  Two years ago, foreign – that is, Russian – newspapers were outlawed in the country; a castrated version of ORT [editor’s note: Russia’s Channel One] programming is aired; the only independent radio station, Radio Liberty, is jammed during Turkmen-language broadcasts. Mayak, the only radio station broadcasting reliable information about the outside world has been taken off the air. The information highway is practically nonexistent. Of 4.5 million people, there are only about 300 private Internet users. Moreover, they have access through the country’s one and only official provider, which blocks all sites associated with Niyazov opposition movements and other independent information sources.

For any revolution, and particularly for rose-colored ones, an opposition movement is essential, and not only within, but also outside, the country. In Turkmenistan, all opposition is prohibited by law. The Criminal Code considers it treason to try and raise doubt in people’s minds about the president’s domestic and foreign policies…While in prison in Ashgabat I met a young man who had been arrested for praising Boris Shikhmuradov at a private gathering. Shikhmuradov is the leader of a movement opposed to Niyazov; Shikhmarudov is a remarkable, courageous individual, educated in Europe, and who was condemned to life imprisonment on trumped-up charges. As a consequence of his remark, the young man got 17 years…For these reasons, there cannot be, and in fact isn’t, legal opposition, as was the case in Georgia when Shevardnadze ruled.

There is an opposition force outside the country; recently it was transformed into one unified democratic front. Today’s Turkmen opposition is something like a government in exile. It comprises a number of high-ranking officials, including ministers, heads of leading industrial sectors, prominent diplomats and famous writers. I know these people well and am certain that what they desire is not to take revenge, but to help their homeland get up from its knees. But they are far away from Turkmenistan and are thus in no position to start a “rose” revolution.

Of course you can’t completely exclude the possibility that some group of citizens will act spontaneously. People have been driven to despair; local outbursts of dissatisfaction are constantly being mercilessly put down by the authorities. But an organizing power able to unite the masses within the country is so far not visible.

WP: The success or failure of a revolution depends on the actions local security forces take. What position do the security forces in Turkmenistan hold?

Komarovsky: I can say with a high degree of certainty that there will be no shooting. Niyazov has been systematically eliminating officers, professionals trained in the USSR. As far as I know, there isn’t one serviceman or high-ranking law enforcement official in the country who will retire without a problem, who won’t be publicly disgraced, degraded or locked up…

There’s nothing surprising about this development really. Once officials have reached the upper echelons of power, like it or not, they become privy to information about the unseemly details of the Turkmen dictator’s life, making them complicit. In this way, they receive information that Niyazov would prefer remained secret. These officials then become problematic for Niyazov. From there on in, everything is straightforward: there is a person, and there is a problem; no person means no problem. As a consequence of this rationale, hundreds of officers from the internal affairs and defense ministries, the army and the prosecutor general’s office have been detained because they “know too much.”

As you can imagine, this doesn’t fill people who are still free with enthusiasm. While I was detained in Turkmenistan, I had a lot of time to interact with high-ranking security officials, primarily during my interrogations.  Left alone with them one on one, they were often empathetic with me. Quite frequently they would quote a Turkmen saying: “When the Shah begins to tyrannize his people, the soldiers leave his side.” While the armed forces officially still back the shah, they have de facto already abandoned him. All that’s needed is a push from the outside for the whole dictatorship to fall down like a house of cards…